Here is my recap of the top headlines and breaking news stories. The lead story is titled, “Donald Trump is the Middle Finger of the Republican Base’.”
Here is what is hot and what is not:
Here is my recap of the top headlines and breaking news stories. The lead story is titled, “Donald Trump is the Middle Finger of the Republican Base’.”
Here is what is hot and what is not:
Today I learned that Barack Obama has proposed an Amendment to the Constitution that would limit the 1st Amendment. It would seem that President Obama doesn’t like the fact that we have freedom of expression, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press. We also have a repeat of the 2008 Democratic Presidential Nomination race because Hillary is back and she is touting her 40 plus years of public service. She does this in spite of the fact that she could possibly have committed major crimes while serving as Secretary of State under President Obama. Let that sink in for a moment. The Secretary of State under the most spiteful president in our nation’s history now wants to be our president.
Now, Hillary claims still, that she is a ‘champion of the people’ and only wants to take care of the lot of us. The problem with taking care of us is that Democrats and RINO Republicans have to pounce on and trounce the Constitution. The Democrats are very familiar with the thrashing of the Constitution. They like doing it in fact they love doing it and they support anyone who says they will continue to do it. For example, look at the rising support for Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. This is the main reason that candidates like Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Dr. Ben Carson, and Carly Fiorina are on the rise because they talk about preserving the Constitution and reducing government in our daily lives. While RINO types of candidates like Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, and Lindsey Graham are on the decline in support.
One of the best slogans we have seen in years comes from Donald Trump. It’s simple and to the point. ‘Make America Great Again’. He is the only candidate I have heard actually say that and of course some would argue that America is still great and that Mr. Trump has it wrong. I would agree that America is still great but we are not as great as we once were and that is what Trump is talking about. He wants to take us back to when the Constitution was still the rule of law , freedom was the rule of the market, and personal responsibility was the rule of the people. That is the kind of greatness Trump is talking about.
Let me be clear on this. You cannot be for the Constitution and personal responsibility if you are for laws that subject the American People to government over regulation and laws that dictate how you act and think not only in public but in the privacy of your own home. And if you are not for the Constitution you cannot be a lover and supporter of the United States of America.
We have more laws, rules and regulations on the books than ever before. We now have less freedom to protect ourselves, our family and loved ones, and our hard earned property yet we still have more crime. The Democrats and the RINOs to this day continue to add more laws, rules and regulations to “protect” us.
It would seem that Americans are eager to elect officials that simply want to rule over us, instead of govern us. We see this in the growing crowds that an admitted socialist is garnering on his quest to garner the Democratic Nomination for President. To me those large crowds are a little troublesome because when you break down what he is saying one has to ask the question how are we going to pay for all of this new spending and government takeover that Senator Bernie Sanders is proposing? If someone dares to ask him that question he and his supporters look at you like you are crazy.
When you force them to face the facts that even if you confiscate all the wealth from the top 50% of this country, it would not even begin to cover the new spending let alone the huge debt we already have they look at you like you are crazy. When you explain that even if you take the entire private economy and confiscate a full year of value and production, it is still LESS than what the national debt currently is they look at you like you are crazy. And that debt is only going to continue to grow.
When you point out that taking money out of the private sector actually takes money out of their own back pocket and you prove it via facts, figures, and numbers as stated by the government itself, they continue with that glassy eyed look. And when you finally tell them that what made this country great was freedom and opportunity and freedom from government over regulation they will look at you like you are really crazy. And when you prove it to them historically, many of them continue to look at you with those same big, glassy eyes.
The sad part is they get it. Don’t let them fool you they really do get it. Now you will have some that will capitulate and convert to a more conservative point of view and you will have others who will ignore you because they are all about class warfare, jealousy, and not about what is doing what is best for the nation but in the end it is all about high taxation and regulation. This class warfare, this high taxation, this over regulation is not American. It is not America. It is not what makes America great.
What makes America great is the people doing what they do best without the interference of the government. That is what made America great in the first place and that is what Donald Trump says will make us even greater in the future.
For liberals who don’t get that, well maybe we can get you some government issued sunglasses.
Alarm bells should be going off within the GOP establishment-class. A recently released poll of Iowa GOP voters showing Donald Trump in the lead with 22% support and Dr. Ben Carson in second place with 14% is a stinging rebuke to the political class. In analyzing this poll I came to the nearly irrefutable conclusion that Americans are looking for a dramatically different type of leadership, because the one trait these two candidates have in common is their lack of a political resume. Voters are beyond fed up with the “managed decline” attitude emanating from political insiders.
I saw this phenomenon up close and personal during my campaign for congress and thought it had reached a crescendo, but I may have miscalculated the anger of the electorate. With this in mind I would like to cover the race for the GOP presidential nomination from an issues-based perspective rather than a candidate-based perspective. There are a number of well-done analyses on Conservative Review covering the gamut of candidate characteristics and voting records, but in this piece I want to cover what issues are winning and losing. For example, extrapolating from the results of the aforementioned Iowa GOP poll, it’s clear that long political resumes are no longer an asset. Therefore, term limits may be a “winner.”
Here are some other issues that are “winning” over the GOP electorate thus far, and some that are “losing:”
Hillary Clinton’s tanking poll numbers with regard to her “trustworthiness” are an ominous sign for the Democratic frontrunner, but they demonstrate that increased accountability is a winner in the eyes of the American people. After the Clinton email scandal, the IRS scandal, the terror attacks in Benghazi, the VA scandal, the GAO scandal, the Fast and Furious scandal, the AP / Fox News phone records scandal, the awful Iran “deal”, the Kate Steinle murder, and the Obama amnesty scandal, Americans of all political stripes are fed up with elected officials and government bureaucrats living by a separate set of “rules,” which would get the average American fined, arrested, and publicly humiliated.
WINNER: Conservative Immigration Reform
The establishment wing of the GOP, and some of their crony capitalist backers, have GROSSLY underestimated the importance GOP voters place on border security and a legal, and orderly, immigration process. Voter outrage is especially enflamed in the wake of President Obama’s lawless executive actions going undefeated in Congress. After watching the first GOP debate, and observing the GOP polling trends, I cannot see any GOP candidate who supports amnesty winning the GOP nomination.
WINNER: Tax Reform
A number of the GOP candidates on the debate stage, and in their campaign platforms, have eloquently spoken about a number of bold, serious, pro-growth-oriented tax reforms which would jumpstart job and wage growth, including the fair tax, a flat tax, a marginal income tax rate cut, and the elimination of economically-distorting, insider tax-deductions. With the recent release of another series of disappointing job numbers and stagnant wage growth, the GOP is again positioned to frame itself as the party of broad-based prosperity if we can relay our message clearly and concisely.
LOSER: Common Core
There are few issues which engender the degree of bipartisan revulsion the way that Common Core does. There are a couple of things you just don’t mess with and the education of our children is one of them. Jeb Bush’s weak defense of Common Core actually served to make the case for dumping Common Core in favor of local education standards, which suit the students of the local school districts, not the interests of power-hungry Washington D.C. bureaucrats.
LOSER: Planned Parenthood and Abortion-on-Demand
After being caught red-handed on videotape, harvesting and trafficking the organs of aborted children, this sick organization may be single-handedly responsible for creating a new generation of pro-life young Americans. The organ trafficking scandal put the issue on the center stage of the national political debate and forced America to confront the horror of abortion without the flowery talking points the far-left has used for years to disguise the genuine horror of what is happening. Also, the laws of political gravity are beginning to reestablish their preeminence with the Trump campaign after his puzzling response to a question about the taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood. Supporting, in any fashion, a policy which forces the taxpayers to fund this horrible organization is a complete and total loser among GOP voters.
LOSER: Political Correctness
Whether you support or revile Donald Trump, you cannot ignore him. His attack on our increasingly politically correct culture generated thunderous applause from the audience during the GOP debate. It generated applause because Republicans, Conservatives, Libertarians, and moderate Democrats are seething with frustration and disappointment at the far-left’s determination to generate false outrage and divide up America using PC word policing. These self-appointed authorities randomly declare people “racist,” “sexist,” and worse, for speaking out against bad policies. The circle of what the far-left declares to be “acceptable conversation” has been shrinking for years as they fascistically categorize a growing number of words as off-limits, and a growing number of Americans as racists, misogynists, xenophobes, homophobes, and worse. As this “acceptable” circle shrinks, and the number of people allowed inside lessens, those on the outside, designated extremists by the media-progressive alliance, will viciously fight back in support of forces willing to take on this alliance.
EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the Conservative Review.
Presidential candidate Donald Trump, we learned, reached out to Senator Jeff Sessions for help crafting the very ‘comprehensive’ and detailed plan—a plan which addresses both LEGAL and illegal immigration with an eye to putting American workers first!
Stay tuned for more.
Nothing ignited my late mom’s Baltimore living-in-the-hood anger more than someone “messing” with one of her “nine months” (her kids). I have a similar protective reaction to attacks on the Tea Party/We the People.
Not only have We the People had to endure mainstream media, Democrat and GOP establishment attacks, some on our side are attacking us for not being “smart enough” to reject Donald Trump. I say, have a little compassion for us. We are witnessing our beloved once great nation becoming a banana republic (dishonest and lawless government) right before our eyes. As patriots, we have faithfully done all the right things. And yet, the wrong things keep happening.
On Fox News Brit Hume called us (the Tea Party) the far right. Senator John McCain called patriots who attended an anti-illegal immigration rally “crazies.” House Majority leader John Boehner called us the far right. Will somebody please tell me what is “crazy” and “far right” about expecting government to function according to our laws and the Constitution?
And then, these arrogant (language I will not use as a Christian) have the audacity to call us stupid for rallying behind Donald Trump.
Where is the compassion for We the people? Yes, my heart goes out for the people. Political Action Committees and GOP candidates raised funds, promising to git-r-done only to leave patriots suffering a string of broken promises. Adding insult to injury, betrayers in the GOP which we gave the House and the Senate call us names; even launching a war on conservatives and the Tea Party. For crying out loud, how much more are We the People expected to take?
To date, my favorite presidential contender is Ted Cruz. Cruz gets it. He sympathizes with all We the People have gone through and vows to fight to make things right, when given the chance.
In essence, both parties said, screw you to We the People. Our Washington cartel is going to further its agenda and there “ain’t” nothing you Tea Party yahoos can do about it. The GOP took us (We the People) out to sea and threw us overboard. Trump threw us a lifeline. Do not attack us for accepting it.
Imagine a fire is raging out-of-control consuming my home. A gang of Hells Angels bikers approaches from over the horizon. They jump off their bikes and begin helping me extinguish the fire. Do I throw up my hands yelling, “Stop! I don’t approve of your lifestyle”? Or, do I simply say thank you?
Please do not conclude I am comparing Trump to the Hells Angels. I am simply saying while you may not agree or even like everything about Trump, the man has unquestionably positively impacted the political landscape. For one thing, illegal immigration would not be on the table if Trump had not made it an issue; standing firm, while bombarded by both parties and the MSM.
Also, the way Trump has dealt with the liberal bias mainstream media has influenced others not to be so easily pushed around by these bullies. With the Left obsessed with forcing conservatives/Republicans to apologize, Trump refuses to go there. It drives the Left crazy. I love it!
The Left regard apologies as blood in the water to totally destroy, devour and end the campaign of a conservative/Republican.
The Fox News strategy to “get Trump” during the GOP debate was extremely unfortunate. I agree with Mark Levin who said Fox blew a major opportunity. Twenty-four million Americans tuned in to the debate greeted with soap opera questions rather than exposing the horrors Obama has released upon our country and how the GOP contenders plan to fix it.
For example: Seventy percent of the population is unaware of the butchery and black marketing of baby body parts happening behind the walls of Planned Parenthood which is still praised by the Democrats. Why on earth was the debate moderators focused on a feud between Trump and Rosie O’Donnell? Truly unfortunate.
By the way, Bill Clinton was surrounded by affairs and scandals including allegations of rape; none of which came up during past debates.
Ted Cruz understands Trump’s popularity and thinks it is unwise for the GOP to “smack Donald Trump with a stick.” Rather than joining the chorus of those calling patriots idiots for liking Trump, Cruz understands and sympathizes with We the People. Cruz’s message is make me your president and I vow to champion your cause.
Cruz was short-changed during the GOP debate receiving very little time on camera. Still, Cruz’s closing comments caused him to soar in the polls; direct, strong and sincere. I am confident Cruz’s numbers will continue to grow.
I will not judge or be upset with my brother and sister patriots who are high on Trump. Any of our 17 contenders are far superior to a Democrat who will surely continue Obama’s evil transformation of America. My gut tells me Ted Cruz will break the tape finishing first.
Robert Ringer is a motivational speaker with a national following, and has authored several best-selling self-help books – both ventures has allowed him to combine philosophy, reality, and critical thinking in a unique style that challenges those who dare to read or listen to what he shares. It is the critical thinking and reality dimensions Mr. Ringer presents that attracts me most; both of which are quickly going out of style, no longer taught in schools, much less communities of higher learning like universities.
Mr. Ringer’s commentary below will not disappoint those who still value critical thinking as well as choose to live in reality; rather than obtain their thoughts through social media and associated venues, sipping their latté and regurgitating opinions from their peers spewing “original thought” from social media. Constructive criticism should not be mean-spirited. Constructive criticism might sting, but should always cause the recipients to confront themselves and take an inventory so improvement can be celebrated later. I pray this is the case with Mr. Ringer’s comments.
Megyn Kelly is razor sharp, impeccably prepared, relentless, tough, verbally skilled, and, to boot, a pretty good looker. She’s also an egomaniacal smart-aleck who seems intent on following Glenn Beck down the path to mediocre celebrity status.
When Kelly is on her game and acts like a broadcast professional, there’s no one better. She’s at her best when she’s going after radical–left liars like Baltimore prosecutor Marilyn Mosby, Planned Parenthood’s criminal elite, and just about everyone who perpetuated the “Hands up, don’t shoot” lie.
But she’s at her absolute worst when her cranial inflammatory condition — Beckitis — flares up and “I,” “me,” “my” come rolling off her tongue in nonstop fashion. Well … come to think of it … she’s at her very worst when she’s interviewing her “hunk” of a house-husband and artificially boosting one of his novels into a New York Times bestseller. I think George and Ira Gershwin had him in mind when they wrote “Nice work if you can get it.”
Borrowing from her ex-husband’s comments about his marriage to Kelly, her current spouse appears to be the wife she’s always wanted. As her ex (Dr. Dan Kendall) put it, “We both needed someone to cook and clean.”
But let’s not get personal here. I have no dog in this fight — I’ve never even met Donald Trump — but starting what is supposed to be a serious debate about serious issues by asking a flagrantly loaded question aimed at one participant — under the dishonest guise of its being for all the participants — is a perfect example of why people dislike the media almost as much as they do politicians.
But for me, Kelly’s loaded question was almost secondary. I was already annoyed by her giddy, self-absorbed blather long before the candidates came out of their bunkers to do battle.
I felt like I wanted one of her colleagues to grab her by the arm and tell her to calm down and act like she’s been in the end zone before. When she showed a video of what she was doing just before the debate (It sounded like a bunch of childish gibberish, so I didn’t really even understand what she was talking about.), it was clear that she was going to seize her moment in the spotlight to focus on her main love: Megyn Kelly.
It reminded me of her appearance on Jimmy Kimmel’s show some time ago when she made a complete ass of herself — giddy off the charts — talking about her experiences at the White House Christmas party and how awkward she felt meeting the Obamas. (No, I don’t watch Jimmy Kimmel, but — as you would guess — she actually played the video on her show. It’s fortunate for her ego that the universe is expanding.)
But back to the debate. After Trump told her, “You’re not doing a very good job,” Kelly looked like an embarrassed little girl who had been slapped on the wrist, immediately frowned and looked down, and remained stone silent for a few glorious moments. With all her smarts, I found myself wondering why she would think she could get away with taking a swipe at the toughest street fighter on the planet.
In any event, whatever else one might think of Donald Trump, he was right on when he told Kelly that she wasn’t doing a very good job — because she wasn’t. As to the blood comments, that whole brouhaha is so stupid that it’s not worth discussing.
Now, let me answer my own question as to why Kelly thought she could get away with taking a swipe at Donald Trump: It’s because she has the ultimate Teflon shield around her — Brit Hume and his wife, Bill O’Reilly, and, most important of all, Roger Ailes. Ailes quickly went on the record by saying that Kelly “is a brilliant journalist and I support her 100 percent.”
Big mistake, Roger. It’s like rewarding a spoiled, pampered child. So it was no surprise when Kelly began her Monday broadcast by saying, “You may have heard there was a dustup involving yours truly and presidential contender Donald Trump.”
ABOUT ROBERT RINGER
Robert Ringer is an American icon whose unique insights into life have helped millions of readers worldwide. He is also the author of two New York Times #1 bestselling books, both of which have been listed by The New York Times among the 15 best-selling motivational books of all time
John Cochrane (aka “The Grumpy Economist”) has posted a long meditation entitled “Rule of Law and the Regulatory State,” in which he makes a very important point:
The United States’ regulatory bureaucracy has vast power. Regulators can ruin your life, and your business, very quickly, and you have very little recourse. That this power is damaging the economy is a commonplace complaint. Less recognized, but perhaps even more important, the burgeoning regulatory state poses a new threat to our political freedom.
What banker dares to speak out against the Fed, or trader against the SEC? What hospital or health insurer dares to speak out against HHS or Obamacare? What business needing environmental approval for a project dares to speak out against the EPA? What drug company dares to challenge the FDA?
Our problems are not just national. What real estate developer needing zoning approval dares to speak out against the local zoning board?
Readers who doubt that this is an urgent problem should read the whole thing, which includes numerous chilling descriptions of regulatory abuse, but here I want to focus on an issue he raises in passing: how best to refer to this urgent problem?
Cochrane says he hasn’t found “a really good word to describe this emerging threat of large discretionary regulation, used as tool of political control.” He considers “socialism,” “regulatory capture,” and “cronyism,” but he rejects all three. Regarding the last two, he notes:
We’re headed for an economic system in which many industries have a handful of large, cartelized businesses — think 6 big banks, 5 big health insurance companies, 4 big energy companies, and so on.
Sure, they are protected from competition. But the price of protection is that the businesses support the regulator and administration politically, and does their bidding. If the government wants them to hire, or build [a] factory in unprofitable place, they do it.
The benefit of cooperation is a good living and a quiet life. The cost of stepping out of line is personal and business ruin, meted out frequently. That’s neither capture nor cronyism.
The fact is, we’ve seen this system of political economy before — most notably in Mussolini’s Italy and in Hitler’s Germany — and there’s a commonly used term for it. It’s fascism. Maybe Cochrane thinks that term is too emotionally charged. However, I’d have thought a bit of emotional charge was warranted. As Cochrane says:
The power of the regulatory state…lacks many of the checks and balances that give us some “rule of law” in the legal system. …
The clear danger we face is the use of regulation for political control. Each industry gets carved up into a few compliant oligopolies. And the threat of severe penalties, with little of the standard rule-of-law recourse, keeps people and businesses in line and supporting the political organization or party that controls the agencies. …
A return to economic growth depends on reforming the regulatory state. But… preservation of our political freedom depends on it even more.
Read the rest here.
EDITORS NOTE: See Steve Horwitz’s “Why the Candidates Keep Giving Us Reasons to Use the “F” Word“; Jeff Tucker’s “Trumpism: The Ideology“; and Jason Kuznicki’s “The Banality of Donald Trump.”
Trump on Megyn Kelly comment. Watch how a CNN reporter get schooled by a female Trump Supporter from New Hampshire.
EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of Megyn Kelly is by AP/Richard Drew/Salon.
Finally someone is shaking up the corrupt politics of Washington, D.C.
Every day brings America closer to the next presidential election. Every day also brings us closer to the debates in which candidates for America’s highest elected office will be questioned about their goals and visions for the future of our nation.
So many important questions that will need to be answered. Where will the moderators begin?
If the moderators are thoughtful and honest, they will begin by asking questions about that most important topic that plays a vital role in all of the other challenges and threats facing America and Americans today. That singular topic is immigration.
While it is rarely if ever discussed in the mainstream media, immigration is arguably the most impactful component of each and every one of the most important challenges and threats facing America and Americans today.
Those challenges include national security and the war on terror, public safety and crime, the economy, the survival of the middle class and unemployment. Those challenges also include public health and healthcare, education, the environment and the critical infrastructure of our towns and cities.
Immigration has been of extreme importance for a very long time but has been all but ignored until very recently. Had it not been for Donald Trump’s statements about immigration, the issue of criminal aliens and the lack of border security, it is quite likely that immigration would still be off limits in the discussions. Trump’s statements and the tragic and senseless death of Kate Steinle in San Francisco by a criminal alien who had been convicted of seven felonies and deported on 5 previous occasions, pushed immigration into the national consciousness and rattled the cages of the leaders of both political parties who had hoped that no one would raise the issue.
Additionally, the great majority of news organizations had been assiduously ignoring immigration, but has lately found it impossible to not provide coverage about immigration and the issues of “sanctuary cities” and the violence perpetrated by criminal aliens.
Trump’s emergence on the national stage — unfettered by the need to raise campaign contributions and making the decision to be his own man and speak his own mind — continues to resonate with many Americans even as politicians from both parties continue to rely on pollsters to tell them what to say and what not to say. They surround themselves with a small army of advisors and “handlers” and try to operate and speak within the confines of what my good friend and Congressional Representative Lou Barletta accurately refers to as “the box.” Not surprisingly, Trump is connecting with many Americans in a way that the other politicians are not because he operates outside the confines of that “box.” The impact this is having is clear.
Most politicians are expressing greater anger and frustration over Trump’s candor than they are over criminal aliens murdering innocent Americans. Many politicians are also more focused on Trump than they are on the administration that has created anarchy in the immigration system — a system that should serve as America’s first line and last line of defense against international terrorists and transnational criminals.
For decades politicians from both political parties have impugned hardworking Americans by claiming that “immigrants do the work Americans won’t do.” This has become the virtual mantra for both parties. Ask yourself if there are, in fact, any jobs that Americans won’t do?
Even as you read this article American workers are trudging off to work boarding commercial fishing vessels where they engage in the most dangerous job in America. They are trudging off to work in coal mines, heading for constructions sites to build towering office buildings, stores and houses. They are racing to put out dangerous fires threatening the lives and property of total strangers. Our American law enforcement officers on the local, state and federal level are chasing down dangerous armed felons, putting their lives on the line as a matter of routine.
Hardworking Americans who still embody the “can do” spirit that built our country are ready, willing and able to do dangerous, filthy and backbreaking work (and do it better and more productively than anyone else) are being insulted by politicians who were purportedly elected to represent them. What an outrageous betrayal.
Even as you read this, American soldiers, all of whom are volunteers, are engaging in violent combat in some of the most inhospitable hellish conditions imaginable. They see their fellow soldiers suffering grievous injuries or being killed before their very eyes, yet, as the appropriate term says, they continue to soldier on.
We are also being told that Americans lack the education and, apparently, the intelligence to take the high-tech STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) jobs even as Silicon Valley and many other employers fire thousands of American workers who have been working in these careers for many years — yet petition the federal government for more H-1B visas to bring in foreign workers to take these very same jobs.
My June 18, 2015 commentary for FrontPage Magazine, “Theft By Deception: The Immigration Con Game,” included this excerpt:
Today increasing numbers of “STEM” (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) professionals are being laid off and replaced by foreign workers from India and elsewhere. The only thing “exceptional” about these foreign workers is that they will work for exceptionally low wages under exceptionally adverse conditions.
Work helps to define us. Work provides dignity, a sense of purpose, opportunities and income. Virtually every college student who attends college does so with the hope/expectation of a brighter future through a career made possible by acquiring a higher level of education.
When young Americans opt to attend colleges they put off working for years. Upon graduation from those institutions of higher learning, where they invested years of their lives studying conscientiously, they find themselves encumbered by massive debts in the form of student loans. All too often they find that they cannot get jobs in their chosen fields of study, including those who took degrees in the STEM disciplines. For these victims of the crime, their share of the “American Dream” and indeed their futures, have been stolen, their time and money wasted.
Understandably, foreign workers send as much of their earnings back to their families in their home countries whether they are illegal alien day laborers or high-tech workers who were admitted into the United States with H-1B or other such visas which enable them to legally work in the United States. That money provides an important revenue stream to those foreign families and their countries. For Mexico, for example, remittances are believed to represent the second largest source of revenue.
Last year the United States lost well over 125 billion dollars in remittances — money electronically transferred out of the United States by such foreign workers. Money also moves in covert ways as well.
Last year India was the recipient of the greatest amount of remittances any country on this planet received, more than 70 billion dollars. This money was wired home by their workers who are employed in countries around the world- although it is the United States that each year loses the greatest amount of money.
A PhD in economics is not needed to understand that as more Americans are replaced by more foreign workers who will send ever increasing amounts of money out of our economy that the U.S. economy will suffer. When middle class families drop below the poverty line as American workers lose their jobs, they lose their disposable incomes. They stop being tax-payers and become increasingly dependent on costly economic safety net programs. This jacks up our national debt and also hurts the economies of cities and states across the United States. This is completely unsustainable.
Undoubtedly the nation’s struggling economy will be important to the debates because America’s economy is linked to national security as well as not only the well-being of America but for millions of Americans. The middle class is getting hammered as family wages stagnate or even decline. Record numbers of American families now live below the poverty line.
Any politician who claims to oppose Sanctuary Cities but supports in-state tuition for illegal aliens is lying. In-state tuition for illegal aliens creates a powerful and costly magnet that incentivizes and rewards illegal immigration.
Undoubtedly the politicians who are advocates for in-state tuition for illegal aliens will insist that once educated these illegal aliens should be granted Green Cards that will enable them to compete, on an equal standing, with desperate American workers and American students who need good jobs.
BOSTON /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — One week out from the first GOP debate, Donald Trump leads the Republican field with 31% of the vote, followed by Gov. Jeb Bush at 15% and Gov. Scott Walker in third at 13%. The survey was conducted July 26 to July 28, with 481 likely GOP voters at a 4.4% margin of error.
Forty percent (40%) of respondents viewed Trump’s comments regarding Senator John McCain’s War record as unimportant to their vote while another 47% said they would be less likely to vote for Trump because of his comments about the Arizona Senator. Interestingly, 11% percent said they were more likely to vote for Trump because of his commentary on McCain.
Rounding out the top 10 Republicans in this poll were Sen. Ted Cruz at 8%, Gov. Mike Huckabee at 6%, followed by Dr. Ben Carson at 5%, Sen. Rand Paul at 4% and Sen. Marco Rubio at 4%. Carly Fiorina was in 9th place at 3% and Gov. John Kasich was tied with Gov. Chris Christie with 2% of the vote. All other candidates received under 1% of the vote; 7% of Republican Primary voters were undecided.
Sen. Hillary Clinton holds a significant lead with 54% of the vote in the Democrat Primary with Sen. Bernie Sanders in second at 33% and VP Joe Biden at 9%. All other announced candidates register under 2% of the vote each. The sample size of likely Democrat Primary voters was 476 with a margin of error of 4.4%.
In a head to head contest, Clinton holds a 2 point lead over Jeb Bush 44% to 42%, an 8 point lead over Walker 49% to 41%, and a 9 point lead over Donald Trump 49% to 40%.
The poll suggests that likely voters are not that thrilled with any of the presidential candidate as all held higher negative then favorable opinions except for Sanders who had a 33% favorable and 32% unfavorable opinion.
Clinton holds an overall 38% favorable and 48% unfavorable rating, Trump is at 31% to 56% rating, Bush at 25% to 52% and Walker at 24% to 38%.
Trump holds the highest favorable rating among Republican primary voters at 54% to 33%, with Bush at 40% to 39% and Walker at 46% to 20%.
ABOUT THE EMERSON COLLEGE POLL
The Emerson College Polling Society poll was conducted Sunday July 26 through Tuesday July 28. The polling sample for both the Democrat and the GOP Primary consisted of 476 and 481 likely voters each, with a margin of error of +/-4.4% and a 95% confidence level. The General Election sample consisted of 950 likely voters with a margin of error of +/-3.1% and a 95% confidence level. Data was collected using an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system. The full methodology and results can be found at www.theecps.com.
RELATED ARTICLE: SHOCK POLL — Donald Trump Leads Jeb Bush in Florida
Hillary Clinton talks of cracking down on the gig economy. Donald Trump speaks of telling American corporations where they can and can’t do business abroad. Bernie Sanders says we have too many deodorant choices. They all speak about immigrants as if it were 1863.
What the heck are these people talking about?
More and more, that’s the response many people have to the current-day political speeches and rhetoric. It’s a hotly contested election, somewhat like 2008, but this time around, public engagement is low, reports Pew.
That’s no surprise, really. Whether it’s the leftists, the rightists, or everyone in between, all of these politicians seem to be blathering about a world gone by — one that has little to do with the 21st century. If they’re not tapping into people’s baser instincts of fear and nativism, they’re dusting off 20th-century talking points about creating “good jobs.”
Maybe there was a time when the political culture seemed to keep up with the pace of innovation. If so, those times are long gone. The rhetoric of electoral politics is exposing the great rift in civic life.
The tools we use every day, the technologies we love, the way we engage each other, the means by which our lives are improving are a consequences of innovation, markets, community, and globalization — that is, by the interactions of free people. Not by politics. And not by the systems politics creates.
The political election is a tired old ritual in which we send our hopes and dreams away to distant capitals. Why do we outsource them to politicians, lobbyists, and bureaucrats: people who are trapped in a system that rewards the worst in people? What’s left of governance is logrolling, spectacle, and unwanted interference in the lives of everyone else.
Politicians seem more concerned with putting the genie of innovation and entrepreneurship back in the bottle than doing anything meaningful. After the election, we try our best to ignore them and get on with life.
Politicians seem more concerned with putting the genie of innovation and entrepreneurship back in the bottle than doing anything meaningful.
In 2012, US voters reelected Barack Obama, and now we’re gearing up to elect someone else. Candidates will talk about their visions and their wonderful plans for the country. But in the last three years, virtually none of the incredible, beautiful upheaval we’ve seen has had anything to do with the presidency or with anyone politician’s plans.
In fact, when you think about what government has done for us in recent years, only one new program comes to mind: Obamacare. Opinions vary on whether that program has been deeply disappointing or an unmitigated disaster.
Now, take a step back and observe the evolution of commercial society and how it is bringing us unprecedented bounty. The digital sector of emergent, market-generated, people-driven, technology-fueled innovation is fulfilling human aspirations and spreading useful services to people in all walks of life. National borders seem ever more arbitrary. Surprises await us around every corner. Our political systems can claim credit for none of it.
And yet, we are once again being asked to turn to politicians to drive progress.
Consider how much our lives and technologies have changed since the last presidential election. Smartphone ownership has gone from 300 million to 2 billion, meaning that most of the population of the developed world — and large parts of the rest — now have access to a wireless supercomputer in their pockets. As a result, we are more in touch than ever.
There are now dozens of ways for anyone to keep in contact with anyone else through text messaging and video, and most of the services are free. Transportation in cities has fundamentally changed due to ridesharing and app-based systems that are outcompeting municipal taxis. Traditional travel lodging has been disrupted through mobile applications that turn every empty room into a hotel, and finding permanent lodging is easier than ever. You can find the ratings for any service or establishment instantly with a click or a tap, long before you purchase. You can feasibly shop for and buy a house without ever having stepped inside of it.
Cryptocurrency is becoming a viable alternative to national monies, and payment systems on distributed networks are being customized for peer-to-peer exchanges of property titles.
The mass distribution and availability of mobile applications with maps means that you are never lost, and, moreover, that you can be intensely aware of everything around you, wherever you are or wherever you are planning to be. Extended families that are spread out over large geographic regions can stay constantly in touch, chatting and playing games.
The way we help our neighbors and communities is improving. We can contribute to charitable causes with just a click. We are closer to our neighbors and their needs — whether it’s a missing cat, a call for a handyman, or childcare for Saturday night. We can be on the lookout after a break-in and share video of the perpetrators instantly.
The way we consume music has fundamentally changed. We once bought CDs. Then we downloaded particular tracks and albums. With Internet everywhere, we now stream a seemingly endless variety of genres. The switch between classical and indie rock requires only a touch. And it’s not just new music we can access, but vast archives and recreations of music dating to antiquity. Instantly.
Software packages that once cost thousands are now low-cost downloadable apps. Many of us live in the cloud now, so that no one’s life is ruined by a computer crash. Lost hardware can be found with built-in tracers — even stealing computers is harder than ever.
Where we work no longer matters as much. 4G LTE means a powerful Internet connection wherever you are, and WiFi on airlines means staying in touch even while above the clouds. Online document signing means total portability and the end of the physical world for most business transactions. You can share almost anything — whether grocery lists or whole writing projects — with anyone and work in real time. More people than ever work from home because they can.
News is now crowdsourced through Twitter and Facebook — or through mostly silly sites like BuzzFeed. There are thousands of competitors, so that we can know what we want to know wherever we are. Once there was only “national news”; now a news event has to be pretty epic to qualify, and much of the news that we are interested in never even makes old-line newspapers.
Edward Snowden revealed ubiquitous surveillance, escaped prosecution, and now, thanks to technology, has been on a worldwide speaking tour, becoming the globe’s most famous public intellectual. This is despite his having been censored and effectively exiled by the world’s biggest and most powerful state. He has a great story to tell, and that story is more powerful than any of the big shots who want him to shut up.
Pot has been effectively legalized in many American cities, and the temperature on the war against it has dropped dramatically. When dispensaries are raided, the news flies all over the Internet within minutes, creating outrage and bringing the heat down on the one-time masters of the universe. There is now a political risk to participating in the war on pot — something unthinkable even 10 years ago. And as police continue to abuse their power, citizens are waiting with cameras.
Oil prices have collapsed, revealing the fallacy of peak oil. This happened despite pressure in the opposite direction from every special interest, from environmentalists to the oil industry itself. The reason was again technological. We discovered better and cheaper ways of drilling, and, in so doing, exposed vastly more resources than anyone thought accessible.
At the very time when oil and gas seemed untouchable, we suddenly saw electric cars becoming viable options. This was not due to government mandates — regulators tried those for years — but due to some serious innovation on the part of one remarkable company. It’s not even the subsidies, such as they are, that are making the difference; it’s the fine-tuning of the machine itself. Tesla even took it a step further and released its patents into the commons, allowing innovation to spread at a market-based pace.
We are now printing houses in one day, vaping instead of smoking, legally purchasing pharmaceuticals abroad, using drones to deliver consumer products, and enjoying one-day delivery of just about everything.
In the last four years, the ebook became a mass consumer item, outselling the physical book and readable on devices within the budget of just about everyone. And despite attempts to keep books offline, just about anything is now available for download, putting all the world’s great literature, in all major languages, at our fingertips.
Here we go again, playing “let’s pretend” and electing leaders under the old-fashioned presumption that it is politics that improves the world and drives history forward.
And speaking of languages, we now have instant access to translation programs that allow us to email and even text with anyone in a way he or she can understand regardless of language. It’s an awesome thing to consider that this final barrier to universal harmony, once seen as insuperable, is in the process of melting away.
These are all ways in which the world has been improved through markets, creativity, and free association. And yet, here we go again, playing “let’s pretend” and electing leaders under the old-fashioned presumption that it is politics that improves the world and drives history forward.
Look around: progress is everywhere. And it is not because we are electing the “right people.” Progress occurs despite politics and politicians, not because of them.
NEW YORK /PRNewswire/ — Hearst Television Inc., one of the country’s largest television station groups and a Peabody- and Cronkite-award-winning leader in television and digital political journalism, today announced it will televise the August 3 Voters First Forum, featuring GOP presidential candidates, in the 27 local Hearst markets across the United States. The forum is produced and hosted by New Hampshire’s Union Leader newspaper and C-SPAN.
The two-hour forum will start at 7pm ET at the Dana Center at St. Anselm College in Goffstown, New Hampshire, on Monday, August 3. Currently 14 candidates are scheduled to appear: Jeb Bush, Ben Carson,Chris Christie, Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina, Lindsey Graham, Bobby Jindal, John Kasich, George Pataki, Rand Paul,Rick Perry, Marco Rubio, Rick Santorum and Scott Walker. Jack Heath of Manchester’s WGIR-AM Radio, host of the station’s New Hampshire Today program, will moderate the forum. Each candidate will have approximately five minutes to answer questions individually on the stage.
Hearst Television, collectively reaching nearly 21 million households, will provide the C-SPAN telecast to its stations for local broadcast. The forum will air on either the station’s primary or digital channel and will be streamed from its website. This enables broadcast-only viewers in these markets the opportunity of seeing the forum as part of Hearst Television’s ongoing Commitment 2016 initiative, which will include multiple debates at the national, regional and local levels, as well as other special political coverage leading up to November 2016.
Hearst Television reaches millions of viewers throughout key election states. Three Hearst stations serve viewers in the first three caucus and primary states: WMUR-TV in Manchester, NH, KCCI-TV in Des Moines, Iowa, and WYFF-TV in Greenville, South Carolina.
“This is an opportunity for us to provide our viewers a chance to see and hear from the large majority of the GOP candidates in advance of the first national debate,” said Emerson Coleman, vice president, programming, at Hearst Television. “There are more than two million households in the cities we serve that may not otherwise have the ability to view this important event on television.”
C-SPAN will show the forum, in its entirety, on C-SPAN TV, C-SPAN Radio, and via livestream on C-SPAN.org. In addition to C-SPAN, the Union Leader, WGIR-AM and St. Anselm, forum co-sponsors include: I-Heart Networks; the Cedar Rapids (Iowa) Gazette; KCRG –TV, Cedar Rapids; the Charleston (S.C.) Post & Courier; and WLXT-TV, Columbia, S.C.
About Hearst Television
Hearst Television, a national multi-media company, owns and operates 31 local television stations and two local radio stations, serving 32 U.S. cities and reaching approximately 19% of U.S. television households. The TV stations broadcast 60 video channels, featuring local and national news, weather, information, sports and entertainment programming, and local community service-oriented programs. The stations also host and operate digital on-line and mobile platforms that extend the company’s brands and content to local, national and international audiences. Hearst Television is recognized as one of the industry’s premier companies, and has been honored with numerous awards for distinguished journalism, industry innovation, and community service. Hearst Television is a wholly owned subsidiary of Hearst Corporation. The Company’s Web address is www.hearsttelevision.com.
This political season has started with a big bang. So far, we do not even have to pay that much attention to the boring Democratic side of this process. What we have at this writing is more than 16 serious candidates for the GOP nomination for President of the United States of America.
I cannot recall a time when we had so many candidates to choose from. We, of course have the typical white male candidates. But we also have many minority candidates representing the Hispanic community and the Indian (from India) community as well as a strong female candidate. The diversity of this field of candidates is staggering, indeed.
But so far, there seems to be one candidate in particular that seems to be garnering the attention of the media and the nation. That candidate is Donald Trump, of course The reason? Well, the reason is very simple. Donald Trump is telling it like he sees it. He is saying what is on his mind and what he believes the problems are. And he doesn’t care if some folks don’t like what he says or how he says it. He is sticking to his guns and the people of this country seem to be liking that.
Now some say that Donald should bow out of the competition. Make no mistake about it this fight for the GOP nomination for president of the United States of America is a competition. It’s a take no prisoners competition where the winner takes it all and he or she just might take the The White House. So there is a lot at stake and the professional politician knows there is a lot at stake because what they cannot have is an unpolished, non-politician ruining their chances of being the next President.
The professionals will say how raw Donald is and they will say how UN-presidential Donald is. They state that as President you have to be more diplomatic. They say that nobody takes him seriously. They say that Donald has no real chance at getting elected. They say that Donald Trump cannot beat Hillary Clinton in the November 2016 election. In short they all will say anything to discredit and to get rid of The Donald because they know that Donald Trump cannot be bought. He cannot be bribed and he cannot be persuaded because he is an honest man with a true American heart and that scares professional politicians’ on both sides of the political aisle.
After all, how can you control a man who is used to calling all the shots? How do you control a man who is self-made and doesn’t need nor want any insider money? How do you control a man who already wields tremendous influence and power around the world in business and political circles? You can’t. They can’t. Let me suggest something for the professionals out there running for high office. Take note of Donald Trump and take note of how the voters seem to be supporting him. Take note that the American people are following him in growing numbers because the American people like the fact that he is not polished.
They know he is brash and bombastic and they know he is a little arrogant. They know he will do his best to clean house in Washington, D.C. if he is elected. They know that many world leaders would not want to negotiate with Donald because he would do what is best for this country and her people. I would suggest that the professionals begin to sound more like Donald and tell us the truth, not what they think we want to hear. Talk to us from the heart not what some poll data thinks we want to hear.
Be bold and bombastic and even a little arrogant in your presence and make the people believe that you are a strong leader that cannot be bought. Make the people believe that you are strong leader that cannot be persuaded and a strong leader that will look after the interest of the people of the United States of America and not their own selfish interest.
In return the American people will then follow you and the American people will reward you with higher office. The American people will back you and support you while in office and all it takes is for you to be more like Donald and less like, well less like you. After all, this nation was started and built by amateur statesmen and they built the most prosperous and most powerful nation this world has ever known. We have had professional politicians in charge for about 150 years or so now and look at the mess those professionals have made. Maybe it’s time we pick the men and women who are not so polished. and not so politically trained.
Maybe its time we choose a candidate with a little tarnish on them because they cannot do any more damage than what the professionals have already done.
RELATED ARTICLE: Is President Kennedy Now a Conservative Republican?
Following the murder of four U.S. Marines and a U.S. Navy sailor by a terrorist in Chattanooga, presidential candidates, including former Florida governor Jeb Bush (R), Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee (R), businessman Donald Trump, Wisconsin governor Scott Walker (R), and former U.S. Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), have called for a change in federal law to allow stateside military personnel to carry firearms for protection. In addition, the governors of Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas have directed the adjutants general of their National Guards to authorize Guardsmen to be armed in their states.
Before the attack in Chattanooga, congressional Armed Services Committee Chairmen Sen. John McCain and Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX) had been planning to include legislation in the upcoming National Defense Authorization Act to clarify an Army post commander’s authority to allow the carrying of personal firearms for protection. Now, numerous other senators and representatives have stated their support for legislation to allow military personnel to be armed for protection of themselves and their fellow troops here at home.
The outpouring of support for allowing military personnel to protect themselves is more than justified by the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, which included an attack upon the Pentagon, and events related to other military facilities thereafter. In 2009, a terrorist killed 12 military personnel and one civilian, and wounded 30 others on Fort Hood, Texas. That same year, another attack occurred upon a military recruiting office in Little Rock, Arkansas, resulting in the death of one soldier and the wounding of another. Over the next two years, law enforcement authorities foiled planned attacks upon military facilities in Baltimore and Seattle. In 2013, 12 people were killed and four were wounded in an attack upon the Washington, D.C., Navy Yard. And only eight months ago, the FBI issued a warning that ISIS was recruiting extremists to attack our military personnel here at home.
Military personnel are effectively prohibited from carrying personal firearms for protection by a Department of Defense Directive of 2011, which states:
Arming DoD personnel with firearms shall be limited and controlled. Qualified personnel shall be armed when required for assigned duties and there is reasonable expectation that DoD installations, property, or personnel lives or DoD assets will be jeopardized if personnel are not armed…
That directive traces back to another Directive from the early 1990s, which contains similar language.
EDITORS NOTE: We encourage readers to contact their U.S. senators and representatives, to voice their strong support for legislation to allow our military personnel to carry firearms for their protection.